The Movement Of Continents Is Impossible Without New Matter Creation.

Where would the force otherwise come from? How would that force get traction? The continents are huge. And they are fully locked in since the surrounding oceans have solid sea floors. Only the huge forces generated by new matter creation could even POSSIBLY explain the movement of a body as large as Antarctica.

But before this is easily understood by even the dimmest of punters we must deal with the real reasons why they would find this hard to believe. The reason behind the reasons.

Here is some points I’ve made in support of Neal Adams elesewhere:

Gresham’s law surfaces in many varieties and certainly there is one relating to paradigms. About the time that neal was discovering his thesis, the Big Bang theory was just beginning to get locked in. This universe really isn’t large enough for both theories. And the only reason the expanding earth theory isn’t accepted already is that the Big Bang theory IS.

The Big Bang theory wasn’t quite fully locked in when I was a kid. Which makes it hard for me to be patient with real dummies like Phil Plait who adheres to this most stupid of paradigms with dogmatic zeal. Plait, lacking any evidence for his theology, seems to have monopolised the skeptic mantle and taken almost all the impressionable young idiots along with him.

There is no theory more stupid than the big bang. Even the global warming scare bows down to its flaming light of dumb.

It is easier to be a third-rate theologian than a top-flight scientist and this is the reason for the big bang theory. Our task is to proceed forward with our thinking as though the Big Bang theory has already been defeated.

The academy can wait around paralysed and it doesn’t matter. The academy can be stuck helpless in its own dogmatic poo poo and drowning in golden showers of science grant whoredom, and it ought be no concern of ours what their current idiotic consensus opinion is.

We want to proceed over the dead body of the big bang and find out how new matter is created and what moves continents.

If new matter is being created, why isn’t the Earth getting bigger? And where is it coming from?

THE EARTH IS GETTING BIGGER THATS THE WHOLE POINT. ENERGY AND MATTER ARE THOUGHT TO BE INTER-CONVERTIBLE. SO THERE IS QUITE A LOT OF CANDIDATES FOR WHERE THE ENERGY COULD BE COMING FROM. THE EARTH HAS A MAGNETIC FIELD. WHICH IMPLIES AN ELECTRIC CURRENT. COSMIC RAYS ARE CHARGED PARTICLES AND MOVING CHARGED PARTICLES ARE AN ELECTRIC CURRENT. OR PERHAPS WE HAVE BIRKELAND CURRENTS COMING IN FROM SPACE. THATS WHAT WE NEED TO FIND OUT.

Well thats sort of what is said Clinton. But you think about it. Supposing we learn that the Antarctic is moving towards the Indian Ocean at 1cm per year. We note that the continent is really bloody thick. We dive all around the coast and find that the bottom of the sea is all rock solid. Except for some places on the other side to the Indian ocean where we find rifting. That is expanding pull-aparts. What are we to make off all this? Are we then to say that its floating? I mean these continents are floating. But how can they move? They are locked in. So where is the opportunity for these fabled plates to move in their fabled way? If we look at where these fabled plates are supposed to end all we are going to find in almost all cases it the ground being stretched apart.

If we saw subduction where would the force be to push one area of land under another? If one territory were merely heavier than another all we would expect was SINKING.

If one area of land is being forced under another then we have to assume is expansion and we ought to look for the rifting on the other side.

Continents are really really big. And they are fully locked in. Only expansion would produce the force and the traction for the force that could give them this appearance of movement.

“I always pondered in my youth about dead plants and animals decomposing on the earth and thus increasing it’s matter.”

By no means as foolish an idea as it may seem to some people. But this would have to be going on IN ADDITION to what I’m talking about.

“What about water? Some new water creation would be nice.”

Yes exactly. There appears to have been a great deal of new water creation over hundreds of millions of years.

Well for one thing I’m suggesting that the movement of continents would be impossible without it. I’m kind of wondering what sort of forces people think are needed to move continents. And whether people can visualise how those forces would be applied.

Yes good point. Look how thick the elephants neck has to be. If the brontosaurus reached quickly for the high branches in our gravity the poor bastard would black out. Lucky the gravity was far less in those days.

I think it would be somewhat more than that. Because the Antarctic is supposed to be moving 1cm per year. And other areas up to 4cm per year. This would imply a faster rate of growth then 1cm per year of the radius I think. I’ll check up just how fast the continents are thought to be “moving”.

Well I don’t have any. Neal Adams has some estimates. I tried to get hold of them but couldn’t open the DOC. document.

What this if it makes you happy crapola? I just follow the evidence and compare paradigms. I am tasked to follow these things and when I see a superior paradigm my readers will be the first to know. I didn’t need to come out with the Mars stuff but it seemed like a stronger case that these were artificial rather than natural remnants.

The claim is being made that the Earth is getting bigger (as an explanation of non-continental drift). I’m trying to get a handle on the measurements involved in this conjecture.

If you are not prepared to use the generally agreed measurements the rest of the world uses, I’m perfectly prepared to work with those that your friend uses. I’m fully open to work with HIS numbers without question.

Well, if the Earth is only 1kms in radius, adding 1cm will have a much bigger effect than if it were, say, ~6400kms radius. Similarly with its mass. So unless there are some alternate numbers someone would like to provide, will you agree the Earth is the mean radius and mass commonly agreed it is now?

I take it you like to see measurements of various sorts when you talk about financial stuff. Financial data is built baselines of various sorts. Otherwise you could not, at even the simplest level, actually calculate arithmetic percentages, let alone derive more complex financial metrics. Agreed?

If so, I’m merely doing the same now in dealing with this proposal about an expanding Earth. I’m trying to establish some sort of baseline for the measurements in this proposal. From that we can then get an understanding of where the proposal is heading.

Well we can move on sure. I’m waiting for you. But my agreement isn’t going to help matters. Since it cannot change the real world outside ones head.

So do what you think you have to do with whatever numbers you want to use. I’m interested. But I don’t really see where this is going. The real world goes about its own business and its measurements aren’t affected by human agreement or disputation one way or another.

I”m kind of waiting to see the scope of the maths-mysticism that you are about to come out with.

Well go for it Zep. Piss or get off the pot. I have to deal with people all the time that think that their mucking about with numbers somehow can impinge upon reality. I don’t know if thats what we are dealing with here. But lets see your maths and find out what you think that it means.

Well fucking hell Zep. What incredible gyp were you planning? You were trying to lock me into something right? So then if I signed up you could thereafter contrive an apparent contradiction. Is that right?

It sure seems like it if you are now not able to come up with some sort of mathematical analysis as promised!!!!!!

Here is James Maxlow. He reckons his own calculations would have it that the earth is increasing its radius by 22mm. He said that when the NASA data came back they determined that the radius was increasing 18mm per year by satelite. But mainstream taxeater unscientists just throw in fudge factors when they get back data they don’t wish to believe. So NASA just eliminated the 18mm. Its not out of the realms of possibility that they would already have fudged matters prior to getting rid of the 18mm which they couldn’t find lesser excuses for.

I would hypothetically go with the 22mm for now. The Neal Adams estimate is considerably higher.

Don’t be silly Paul. New matter must be being created all the time. This follows from the theory that energy and mass are really two manifestations of the same thing. And we see many cases where mass is being converted to energy. But not many where things are going the other way.

So we would have to assume that the process is being reversed. And it therefore makes a lot of sense that the reverse process was going on beneath our feet all this time.

Bearing in mind that the Big Bang is evidence-free crap unscience, we have to then assume that energy-mass conversion is a two-way street.

Sorry for the delay. I have a life that includes actual real work, so that has priority.

So shall we now accept it is 22mm increase annually? The “unscientist NASA-ignored” value? Any other offers? I would not want to be accused of being uncooperative here. (Not that this makes a lot of difference, but hey!)

The growing earth is whatever size it is right now independent on what we agree on Zep you dummy. Just give yourself an approximate figure. We can hardly agree on an exact figure if NASA has explicitly chosen to rig the data in order to get rid of an alleged error.

Who and/or what is JohnZ? More to the point, why should I even care? No, no bets. I do not ever bet on anything.

If anyone else wants to supply some sort of numbers for this then please do. I do not want to be accused of using “unscience NASA-cobbled fudged” numbers. So if you’ve got any of your own you think I should rather use, PLEASE put ’em up. Otherwise I have no choice but to go with the official ones, as they are the only ones I can get.

Not that this matters particularly – the arithmetic is so simple you can go do the calculations yourself in the privacy of your own home. 😉

What, all you can do is swear at me? Clearly you have no answers to the rather huge problems being outlined here. 11,246 cubic kilometers of problems, every year! So where does it come from…? Well?? And that’s just the start of them, and the most obvious.

I DID ask people for their numbers to work with. You got some others I can use? How about we pretend the Earth is only 10kms across. And it’s flat. 😀 😀

Here’s Graeme, not so long ago in this very topic (you just scroll up and reda, that’s how you find it): “Here is James Maxlow. He reckons his own calculations would have it that the earth is increasing its radius by 22mm.”

What stalling? Please explain where 11,246 cubic kilometers of dirt comes from each year. This is the volume that needs to be created if the Earth is to expand 22mm on average in one year. That’s a cube over 22 kilometers on a side being created. Every year.

So would you like the to see the result with 10cm? 20cm? You do know it will be significantly more than that required to be created, don’t you…

“What stalling? Please explain where 11,246 cubic kilometers of dirt comes from each year. This is the volume that needs to be created if the Earth is to expand 22mm on average in one year.”

Well thats just magnificent if true. Lets see your working? Clearly this is new matter creation at or near the centre of the earth. Which puts the energy-mass pathway on an equal footing to the mass-energy conversion. Which clears up another mystery of science.

OK, let’s say the Earth is gaining mass every year (and at a constant rate of 22mm each year, for example, it WILL be exponential in volume). Let’s ask the other geniuses here – what other physical effects will a bigger mass Earth cause?

Hey Pauline, what “genius”? This is primary school stuff – looks like you never made it that far if you call this “genius”.

Those aren’t serious critics. They are just a bunch of prancing bumsucking homos. I may not check out Z’s blog for awhile. Its hardly likely that they would have come up with evidence that the carbon tax is a consumer exise surely.

Lets have a look at your working here? You make the claim. Lets see your maths calculations? If thats how much matter you need to push the continents around well thats hardly all that surprising. But lets make your act transparent in any case. How much magma gets released every year according to records of such? Do they know how much gets released underwater?

OK, Pauline, have it your way. It’s not a constant rate. So how about you give us the rate for 2008, 2007, 2006, and so on. Or any other significant year or period or era. You go for it, I’ll accept and work with it. How much more accommodating can I be!

Not that it matters much. I did the calculation for just ONE year using as-supplied numbers. What the results mean is up to you to explain, not me.

Zep what exactly is your problem here. Matter exists. That means it has to be created. We have seen very little evidence of its creation until now. And there we have it. Thousands of square kilometres of the stuff.

Pauline knows a few swear words and threats and not much maths. What a cutie! 🙂

Uh, no, Graeme, I have not made any claim at all. The claim is at the top of this topic – an expanding Earth explaining continental separation. I am merely doing the maths based on this claim – something any educated person can do if they try.

What that means to plate tectonic theory I won’t speculate. But first, there needs to be a rational explanation of the creation of all this subterranean mass. And you would need a LOT of active volcanoes to create a 2lkm cube each year. People do tend to notice such things, despite NASA’s yells to shut them up…;)

You do appreciate that a 21km cube would be twice as high as Mt Everest? You could see it from space and stuff! 🙂

Right. But lets have your calculations anyhow. We see everywhere in the universe matter has a half-life and is degrading to energy. Or at least when it degrades to electrons and protons some mass is lost in this degradation. So we would expect this mass to be replaced at roughly the same rate. It just so happens that it appears to be in planets that this mass creation is taking place. Not the least bit strange.

Your contentions about mass replacement notwithstanding, we are talking only volume here. This 11,246 cubic kilometers could weigh as little as a duck (or Pauline’s brain) due to whatever theory you like to employ. It is still 11,246 cubic kilometers INCREASE in volume. That requires some explanation, and “volcanoes” doesn’t cut it.

If the mass is being recycled, let’s say the total mass is not changing much. So for the Earth to get bigger in volume, the mean density of the Earth must be decreasing. Which implies that at some time in the past it was extremely dense, and some time in the future the Earth will become something of a gas-giant like Jupiter. Reasonable conclusion?

So its precisely this sort of compression forces that you would need to push whole continents around. Bearing in mind that these continents are locked in all around by the solid sea floor. Think of any combination of forces that you can imagine to push these continents around. And you will see that they cannot do the job. But the compression forces pushing on all sides from the centre of the earth CAN create the necessary forces to do this job. And this is really the only thing that COULD create these forces and nothing else.

No this is not really credible. It would have to be new mass creation. There is no mechanism by which the centre could be turning to foam or something. Thats just silly. And we can see that the gravitational force has increased a great deal. Or Mrs Argentinosaurus could barely have gotten out of bed in the mornngs.

“So let me get this straight: You are saying that forces on the sides of continents push them around the surface of the Earth.

Correct?”

No thats what you are saying. And its impossible. The forces must be far more comprehensive than that. Or there would be no way for them to get traction. And there is no force production that could do it.

OK, it’s an exponential increase. What sort of rate increase are we talking about? I appreciate it may not be constant, but it appears to be heading up a fairly predictable slope (otherwise we could not say it was exponential).

For example, what might the appropriate values (delta mean radius, etc) be in 100 years from now? 1000 years?

Graeme, you just said this: “So its precisely this sort of compression forces that you would need to push whole continents around. Bearing in mind that these continents are locked in all around by the solid sea floor. Think of any combination of forces that you can imagine to push these continents around. And you will see that they cannot do the job. But the compression forces pushing on all sides from the centre of the earth CAN create the necessary forces to do this job. And this is really the only thing that COULD create these forces and nothing else.” So do the continents move, or do they not? Regardless of the reason.

Well you know what exponential slopes are like right? I couldn’t tell you that. Depending on what part of the slope you are at your calculations could be radically different.

Maxlow has the early earth starting off around the size of the moon as far back as he can trace it. And he has it growing very slowly for most of its lifetime. Just a few microns per year. Maxlow reckons we will progress to a giant gas planet like Jupiter or Saturn. And the growth will slow down and stop.

Adams thinks the progression will continue past Jupiter and the onto being a start and so forth.

The question is as it stands. You have made a statement about something and I’m simply trying to follow through with it. They do it all the time in finance, trying to predict futures. That’s all this is, but with (supposedly) more accurate figures.

I’m following YOUR train of discussion here. If that’s not to your liking then I can’t help that.

Well yes they move. But they are going to move due to the earth expanding. But the expanding earth is mostly going to manifest itself where-ever the crust is weakest. Then the totality of the forces present will break a rift open leaving everything else to move on both sides.

See your theory tries to say that something is pushing these continents around on continental plates. But that cannot happen. You can imagine a continent rocking backwards and forwards a few microns here and there. But this continental drift business is utterly untenable.

Do you agree the increasing radius of the Earth means not only increasingly greater volume, it also means increasingly more surface area? (I take it I don’t have to go through the exercise of demonstrating this.)

Yes of course. This is about the stupidest line of questioning ever devised. There is a continuing increase in surface area. But the continents have remained largely the same the whole time. Thats why they all fit together like a jigsaw on the size of a globe about the current size of the moon.

“I’m not discussing any other theory but this one. So let’s not get sidetracked with that.”

You fuckwit!!! What sort of a moronic statement is that? The theory doesn’t exist in a vacuumn you dope!!!! The theory is derived STRAIGHT FROM THE FOSSIL RECORD. The theory comes from out of the fossil record and is confirmed by that. If you get two globes and you cut out the continents from the bigger one they will fit nicely onto the smaller one. And you will be able to tie up the expansion with the fossil record.

We are heading up the exponential. As evidence for the very slow rate of change for billions of years and only really taking off about the time of the first dinosaurs. The dinosaurs would have been able to migrate back and forth between the North and South hemispheres to always be in the Summer.

So far we have 11,246 brand new cubic kilometers of Earth per year to explain. We have an Earth that is gaining mass rapidly but no-one will explain the expected changes in physics that should ensue. And now we have a theory of continental divide that has “a few issues”.

Whats to explain about them? You just have to live with it. There is nothing to explain. Its the other way around. If we didn’t have mass being created then this is what would take the explaining. Since as you see there is a lot of mass around.

You can say “In the beginning there was nothing and then it exploded” I my guess is you adhere to this unscientific notion. But we really want to be driven by first-rate evidence and not third-rate-theology.

““I’m not discussing any other theory but this one. So let’s not get sidetracked with that.”

You fuckwit!!! What sort of a moronic statement is that? The theory doesn’t exist in a vacuumn you dope!!!! The theory is derived STRAIGHT FROM THE FOSSIL RECORD. The theory comes from out of the fossil record and is confirmed by that. If you get two globes and you cut out the continents from the bigger one they will fit nicely onto the smaller one. And you will be able to tie up the expansion with the fossil record.”

As I said, I’m discussing YOUR theory here, the one in the OP. Not any other continent creation theory, past, current, or future. Swearing only makes you look stupid, not me.

It doesn’t matter who LOOKS idiotic you fuckwit. Its you that are BEING idiotic. You cannot section off one theory from any other. Since knowledge is holistic. I ought not have to explain that to you you dim bulb.

Now you adhere to the creation story THE BIG BANG is that right?

Well clearly if we don’t wish to adhere to creation stories like the big bang, and instead wish to go with the evidence, then there is nothing particularly mysterious about matter creation. SINCE THE MATTER IS HERE and therefore must have been capable of creation.

See you are going about it the wrong way. You have to compare paradigms. You go in for the floating continents idea. An idea that lacks creidibility. And you go in for the idea of the Big Bang. The stupidest idea in all of unscience. There is no way to investigate matters without comparing the implications of the competing paradigms. So you can drop that idiocy for starters.

What you are trying on is the Popperian-Faux-Falsification rort. But your own ideas have to stand or fall on the evidence as well.

Well what is your competing explanation for the fact that matter exists?

You have no explanation at all?

So you have nothing.

And yet we know that matter is being created in the Earth from convergent evidence. We know also that everywhere matter is breaking down. So how is matter being created to balance that which is being broken down.

You have no explanation for your crankery on this matter. And no evidence for your Big Bang creation theory.

Matter must be created by some fashion or it would not be here. And here we find that it is created in the centre of planets. If it isn’t created there WHERE IS IT BEING CREATED. No answer from you on this score.

The precise way the matter is created is immaterial and not my job to discover. The fact is we know that matter is created by some mechanism, and we have found out that it is created in planets. It will be hard to figure out the mechanism when its going on thousands of kilometres in the ground but if government financing of science actually worked the poindexters would be investigating the issue right away.

But the growing earth theory does not the least bit wait on their professionalism or lack thereof. We see that there was a mystery with matter creation. And we find that the WHERE half of that mystery has been solved.

“No explanation is being offered for 11,246 cubic kilometers of dirt being created Ex Nihilo every year.”

How is THIS!!!! for leftist projection. The idiot Zep. Clearly a big bang believer, is accusing me of saying that the matter is created EX NIHILO. No of course not. Nor was there any reason to throw me in with the basket-weaving big bang believers.

OK dumb fuck. Lets have your explanation for new matter creation and geological sheer zones. And while you are at your frenzy of leftist projection how about sort out how it is that these continents are pushed around in your moronic view.

Aint that a fact. Conceptual audit. F for fail. Actually in my day he’d get a Z for Zep. But the kids have this grade inflation to help them along.

All that time and the dumb cunt had nothing. And now another dumb cunt shows up, does not explain geological sheering, and claims it was me. That silly cunt deserves a Z for Zep. Grade inflation be damned.

I suspect this 11000 cubic kilometres of new mass creation that zep has discovered will be mostly hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. That way we will wind up with a lot of water and methane being produced. And by the time the methane makes it up to us it will be glorious oil and other hydrocarbons.

We might expect at least a 1000 cubic kilometres of oil each year. Marvellous. Because Australia needs to re-industrialise. “Heavy Metal Don’t Mean Rock And Roll To Me.”

What would be good is hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, boron, thorium and uranium. And the uranium and thorium particularly created atop giant bubbles of oxygen so as to expedite the delivery of these vital items right up to some faultline or other just offshore. Just offshore of all the nuclear reactors shining like bright beacons of science and reason all around the coast of Australia. With their aesthetically pleasing water vapours rising majestically into the sky from their cooling towers.

Hopefully we can then have tourists throwing money into the water so that enterprising native children can dive down for the money and while they are there bring up large nuggets of uranium and to be fed straight into the nuclear reactors, and take a breath of pure oxygen while they are down there.

In this one vision we see the solution to all known social problems in the world today.

As I don’t have my computer that can access my admin function, I’m going to have to log a post for a new thread here. Being as it was to the ABC and it may not get through.

“No good Jon. The government is going to reneg.

But you certainly have highlighted a valid need here. If we were on an 100% backed commodity standard, and people could lend to a 100% backed bank, at interest, then the retirement savings of our elderly would be secure. Because government promises are all just paper and thin air. But interest-bearing gold money doesn’t lose its value. Never loses its value. Doesn’t lose its value through trials by fire over 1000 years of tumultuous history. Through revolution, famine, war and dark ages, the gold coins will hold their value. And we know this because we can pull a ship from the bottom of the ocean that hasn’t seen the light of day for hundreds of years, and there will be the best coins just as valuable as they ever were.

We have robbed the current generation of retirees all their lives through government parasitism and the inflation tax, and we have to maintain their dignity and our own by helping them through. But if we can establish fully-backed private money now then younger people can plan for retirement with great assurance, and that will be good for them and good for the taxpayers of the day also, who ought to be free at last, free at last.

Well given that your real world observations apparently don’t extend much beyond the kitchen, you might try and explain how, if continents are fixed, rocks lying next to each other in major geologic shear zones were once thousands of miles apart.

In what way does subduction explain the phenomenon of sheer zones? These one-word answers aren’t really good enough. I’ll scroll up to see what other explanations you might have come up with.

“Well given that your real world observations apparently don’t extend much beyond the kitchen, you might try and explain how, if continents are fixed, rocks lying next to each other in major geologic shear zones were once thousands of miles apart.”

Well you haven’t explained it. You explain it first using your theory. Maybe one one of the really big blokes threw the rock. You explain this phenomenon first. How does your theory explain this business?

I can see a great big filibuster coming on here. How do you know that the rocks used to be apart? Its very easy to know that geological features used to be together and now they are apart. But how can you know that it used to be the other way around? So far it looks like you are just making it up.

This must be where the dumb leftist ties up a totally independent phenomenon as proof for his idiotic theory. So for example you have the cosmic background radiation. It lends no weight whatsoever to the ludicrous idea of the big bang, everyone predicted there would be a background radiation and not the bangers, and there was never any claim that the background warmth would be zero Kelvin. But these lunatics contend that the background radiation is proof of the big bang. Now we’ve got this DH dummy claiming that sheer zones are proof of subduction….. and not only proof of subduction but proof of enough subduction to counter all the spreading we see going on.

Well actually its not the least bit clear what he’s claiming. Since he won’t explain. And of course the other dummies aren’t in a position to leap in and put up a clear explanation.

What about these alleged plates. Looks like you don’t have any explanation for sheer zones and have jumped to something else. So it comes across as a lot of stupid innuendo. Since you are unable to explain any phenomenon but are instead hopping from one foot to the other.

“Convergent boundaries” now. Before that it was the one word answer “subduction” and now at least we are up to two word answers. So the dumb leftist is just dropping buzz-words in lieu of an explanation.

Still no explanation of shearing. So the filibuster continues with this dummy.

No Graeme, with your crock of shit theory areas of geological stress such as shear zones, subduction, convergent plates (such as the Eurasian plate and Indian plate) etc simply wouldn’t exist. Yet they do.

Put up your explanation for these things DH. One at a time now. How about trying to explain sheer zones under your threory. If all we are going to get is filibustering on our part then when I get my proper computer back I’m just going to have to thin your posts down.

You are acting precisely how we would expect you to act if your theory is no good. Vague and evasive.

Come on DH. Explain how a shear zone works in your make-believe world. Its very easy to see how you can have great and consistent forces at work under the expanding earth theory. But these forces are more or less impossible under your theory, which is why you are unable to piss or get off the pot.

I take it that in your view India is, by some mysterious and unknown force, colliding into the Eurasian “plate” and forcing up the Himalayas is that right? Where is the force for this fantasy coming from?

If you are unable to explain shear zones perhaps you can leap ahead to explain this mysterious force production.

Well DH you are sure doing a good job of highlighting the weakness of your dopey theory. You are entirely unable to provide an answer for these things that you allege that earth expansion cannot explain.

We are just not getting any answers from you DH. You showed up here and said I was refusing to explain how earth expansion is compatible with shear zones. From there on in you have filibusted. So its a repeat of Zeps performance only worse.

“Bird I couldn’t care less whether you are gay, but please explain mountains. ”

That wasn’t me dummy. Some sodomites, Keynesians and Big Bang believers have clearly caught wind of my lack of editing abilities today. You know the rules Edney. Mountains are easily explained where genuine force production is possible. How do you explain mountains under your irrational belief system. DH cannot explain shearing zones. And you are unable to explain mountaining.

So here we see the relentless tyranny of leftist idiocy. Edney cannot explain mountains. So he shows up saying that I cannot explain mountains. DH cannot explain shear zones. So he shows up saying its me.

Shear zones and mountains are easily explained where genuine force production is possible because of the fact that this force production need not always apply in completely even ways. Rifting and expansion on the seas on both sides could easily cause shearing or mountaing. If Asia was being forced away from the Noth Pole its mountaining that you could get. But under the stupid Edney theory there is absolutely no way that force can be produced that would squash India up against Asia.

So all of these things are easily explained under new mass creation. But cannot be explained under continental drift. The continents cannot drift anywhere. Manfiestly they are totally locked in.

Thats not an explanation you fucking moron. So lets have an explanation. So far you have proved only that your theory CANNOT explain anything. Thats the evidence you have brought. And you haven’t brought anything other than that.

So lets have your explanation you stupid cunt.

Obviously the new mass creation theory is looking better all the time. Since it can explain everything and the stupid theory cannot explain any damn thing at all.

Look how silent and evasive the idiots side of the argument is? Edney asks me to explain mountaining. Knowing full well that his own stupid theory that he adheres to only because of mental and moral reasons specifically is unable to explain mountaining. He mentions this and then he is forced to go silent. Whereas DH jumps from here and the wiki and gives these two word explanations since he understands nothing at all about the problem. But just tries to read the wiki to absorb the keywords.

“Bird you moron, the mantle is convecting this provides a friction that pushes the plates around.”

WHAT A LOAD OF IDIOCY. That doesn’t happen. Prove it. How could that possibly happen? The forces could never be large or stable enough. They would be entirely unable to move entire continents. The consistent one-way force production simply isn’t there.

So in fact your explanation is no better than DH’s. Essentially you’ve just given the one-word answer “convection”.

But thats no answer at all. Go again. How are the forces produced that could possibly move continents that are manifestly locked in by the sea surface all around them.

No no. Its YOU that refuses to explain it you lying cunt. Its easy to see how mountains can be produced so long as you have a serious force that can push things around. You cannot not explain mountains.

So you’ve just laid on a pathetic leftist reversal.

Explain the movement of continents. You cannot do it. Because convection does not lend itself to the production of consistent forces. So you just are fucking winging it mate.

And in your view where does matter come from? You just have it arriving through magic.

Notice the fear in these purveyors of bad science. The fear it inspires to ask them a simple question. He will not answer the question out of sheer fear. Because to even answer the question is to be caught out.

“Now let me ask you a question. The material in the asthenosphere. More or less dense then the material in the continents. More or less dense. GO!!!!!!”

Lets have that answer you pathetic cunt. We see here that my preferred theory explains everything. And theirs explains nothing, and it leaves them totally fearful of answering the most basic questions.

This is what these leftists are like no matter what topic. This is the same if its Mark Hill or Cambria squirming out of proving that there is a fiscal multiplier. It matters not what they are talking about. They are fucking morons, they are fucking liars, they are morally handicapped, and so they cannot answer the simpleist fucking question.

Edney you cunt. Which is the most dense. The material in the hypothesised athenosphere? Or the material in the hypothesised continental plates???

You can see where this is going can’t you people? Clearly the theory of subduction is untenable under their ideas. Under their very ideas subduction cannot be explained. Under the expanding earth theory there are forces created which could explain subduction although you would expect it to be relatively rare. But under continental drift theory its happening all the time and yet it cannot happen.

“Clearly the theory of subduction is untenable under their ideas. Under their very ideas subduction cannot be explained. Under the expanding earth theory there are forces created which could explain subduction although you would expect it to be relatively rare. But under continental drift theory its happening all the time and yet it cannot happen.”

Except that subduction happens all the time, is observable, and is easily explained by continental drift, rather than your magic matter blatherings.

What next Graeme? Glass tubes on Mars? I forgot, we’ve already had that.

So now the dumb cunt reckons there is this layer BELOW the continents that is LESS DENSE then the continents. Well no wonder he was loathe to own up to this theory. Notice that this theory gets more and more foolish as it continues. Because if there were a flexible layer that was less dense then the layers above it there would be movement alright. The continents and the sea floor would be sinking and the lighter layer would be rising. It might take awhile but this state of affairs could never be a forever thing. But it is precisely this sort of idiocy that you need when you are committed to keeping bad paradigms alive.

“The asthenosphere is a portion of the upper mantle just below the lithosphere that is involved in plate movements and isostatic adjustments. In spite of its heat, pressures keep it plastic, and it has a relatively low density. ”

A relatively low density. RIIIIIIIGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHTTTT. Well it must do. Because this is the only way these guys can explain any subduction. Of course the whole theory is just utterly foolish. Which is why DH took so long to own up to it and my rope-a-dope play was so drawn out.

We have seen how the doctrine of continental drift is untenable. Now here is a small youtube showing clearly how unavoidable the growing earth doctrine is. It cannot be denied except by leftist idiots.

I haven’t seen what betting distraction Z has come up with this time. But we don’t want to encourage these irrational betting distractions any more than we would want to encourage Scotsman to ride a tandem. Every time we have you committed irrationalists beaten then some dumb cunt produces an irrational bet and that starts another leftist filbuster. We might call this the Annan-Cycle, And its not to be encouraged. What is to be encouraged is simple faithfullness to the evidence.

Notice what a complete waste of time the filibuster that Zep, DH and Edney tried on just on this one subject. Or on the global warming fraud? These people just waste time and they are liars. Now there is no way I’d want to encourage a whole new category of filibusters on top of what you Big Bang fantasists have already got on the go.

No we haven’t dodo. One minute your saying plate tectonics can’t work because the asthenosphere is denser than the lithosphere, and when presented with the fact that it’s actually less dense, well that’s evidence against tectonics as well. Neat trick fuckwit.

And if you want evidence concerning relative density you might look up the Chile earthquake of 1960.

And gee Paultard: muffins, unknownium, and now the sun being powered externally by an electrical field. Funny, I could have sworn it was nuclear fusion.

How does it work, do you think?

Has Graeme told you about his theory of how Mars was once populated by a race of Space Lizards?

Haven’t responded to Z, Graeme. You realy are the most gutless of gutless wonders.

Presented with the contention that the lower layer is less dense we see how totally untenable this theory of yours is. How can this layer be flexible and LESS dense and it not rise to the top with the sea and land falling underneath it?

Your theory just gets more silly and it cannot explain any damn thing.

So the cosmic background radiation proves the Big Bang (not) and the Chile earthquake proves that a lower layer is lighter than the surface layer (not). But do tell us about this non-evidence that you reckon is coming from Chile. You’ve just fucking got nothing mate.

But you are helping show how totally untenable this theory is. To even allow for subduction under this theory they have to pretend that a lower level is lighter or rather less dense. Which of course is impossilbe and flat out idiotic. But by their own admission it has to be that way or subduction would not be possible.

“And gee Paultard: muffins, unknownium, and now the sun being powered externally by an electrical field. Funny, I could have sworn it was nuclear fusion.”

The evidence points in the direction of the external electric field and not by fusion. There will be fusion going on in the corona because of its extreme heat in the millions of degrees. The proof of the electric theory is that the corona is far hotter than the suns surface. Hence the energy is coming from the outside in. And must be. Or else the corona would have to be cooler than the surface. The other giveaway to the wrongness of the fusion model is the sun-spots. With the sunspots you can look right inside the sun. And you see that it is black or black in comparison to the rest of the suns surface. This would not be the case if inside the sun was hotter. So the energy is clearly coming from the outside. And manifesting itself more strongly in the corona.

How does Sun maintain his size despite burning so much fuel? He is obviously expanding.

And all the evidence converges on some electrical force providing Sun’s energy.

I think this is pushing us towards there being a new element in the core of the earth and the Sun that absorbs galactic energy waves. Maybe it’s a compound of elements already known to us. I don’t know.

I suspect it would just build up from your hydrogen atom building blocks. Its getting from electric currents and subatomic particles to hydrogen that is where the mystery would be. There could be any number of possibilities. But the scientists won’t find it unless they look for it. And I’m not going to be able to conjure this Ex Nihilo.

We have plenty of options for generating energy. We have uranium, and thorium and we have the possibility of boron fission/fusion. Boron fusion/fission is a particularly good idea because it generates electricity directly. So you don’t need to have a steam driven turbine. Which would mean a far more cost-effective energy generation. But if we cannot do things that way still we have plenty of energy production from standard fission.

“and are you with me that there is a link between galactic electricity and the expanding earth?” That would appear to be the most obvious inference yes.

In the case of the sun they have false colour photos where you can actually see the birkeland currents going into the sun. So perhaps something similiar is happening with earth. But then one doesn’t really know. One can only suggest that this is a good lead.

If this is the case you would expect a planet to grow more quickly once it had developed a very strong magnetic field. So you would expect the earth to be growing quickly but mars and the moon to be growing only very slowly. But then thats all wild speculation. Its only that the earth is growing that is a fact we can be very sure of.

I don’t see interstellar travel as being a cost-effective venture. Occasionally it may be forced on people if there local planets became unliveable. But I don’t see such undertakings as ever being able to pay the bills.

You would expect new matter creation to be endothermic in nature. Perhaps it absorbs neutrinos, electrical charge and heat energy. Perhaps its the natural thing when you have gotten an electrical current, powerful heat and pressure and it may be happening where the majority of the material is subject to powerful positive ionisation. We know that light energy can wind up leading to pair production, essentially out of nothing. The pair is the electron and the positron. The idea would be for an environment that processed the positron into something more stable in a region somewhat electron-scarce, prior to it being destroyed by finding another electron. Who knows? Under such powerful electric charge, heat and pressure, and in the presence of neutrinos from the fusion reactions in close proximity, it may be the case that the pair production goes directly to an electron and a proton.

Obviously we just cannot know at this point the HOW of matter production. But its pretty good going that we’ve already managed to track down the WHERE of matter production.

“What worries me is that Earth’s growth is accelerating. Voyager produced data to that effect.

And the greenies are fixated on bullshit AGW. We should be harnessing galactic electricity and getting ready to bail on this rustbucket.”

Yes it should be accelerating. But look at the bright side. That means the greens have no case in terms of us having to hold back on our use of resources. The human race will never use 11000 cubic kilometres of material no matter how much fission or fusion we have going on. We can never dig and process that much material in any given year.

Our resources are basically unlimited and growing more volumnous all the time. The tough gig will be putting up with gravity a 100 million years from now. That would be a sonofabitch if the planet didn’t lose its growth spurt.

However, a recent assessment by Merrill Lynch estimated the Government could raise nearly $13 billion from the sale of the electricity industry. The sale of the trading rights of the power generators alone would be worth $9 billion-$11 billion, and the retail assets – Energy Australia, Integral Energy and Country Energy – worth $2.6 billion.

The door is open particularly to Chinese bidders, Mr Tripodi said. “The Chinese are very much welcome,” Mr Tripodi said, who made reference to TruEnergy, which already owns a power station near Wollongong, and which is owned by China Light and Power.

Going after these high sale prices guarantees a crony market form after sale. So not only do these guys want to sell out to the communists. They want to do so guaranteeing a non-competitive market afterward.

Notice that they want to sell them all off in one hit instead of in the smallest cash-flow units. Thus guaranteeing the advantage to cronytown generally and the Chinese Communists specifically. Also making absolutely sure that big business doesn’t grow out of small business success.

This treachery by the NSW government just shows the need for development of private means of harnessing galactic electricity.

How ironic it would be. Mao wanted every Chinaman to have a smelter in the backyard. Imagine if every Aussie had a galactic transformer plugged into the flat screen and the jacuzzi! Then we’d show ’em.

Hard currency and private enterprise are the only way this is going to happen.

Notice that with these appalling traitors who are after all only after slush fund money for vote-buying…. notice that no attempt is made to ensure an investors market FOR PRODUCING NEW PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY. Rather these guys are all into getting a windfall of taxeater and consultant splurge-cash by selling off all the old stuff. What they are not interested in is producing an overcapacity from new capital investment. Which would require them to loosen zoning requirements for one thing and lobby the Feds for another. But they don’t want to do the hard yards. They’ll just sell off what others have built for purposes of splurging.

We could start with uranium. Use the heat, electricity and hydrogen from uranium to enhance any carbon we can get hold of. Which includes wood from trees to be used in this way instead of going up in smoke in environmentalist induced bushfires. …. It includes household and commercial rubbish. It includes coal, lignite, oil shales, tar sands, perhaps algae… The whole lot can have nuclear heat, electricity and hydrogen from nuclear power applied to bring down the cost of synthetic diesel.

In the future boron fusion/fission ought to be able to bring down that cost still further to below 20c for a gallon of synthetic diesel. Free at last, free at last.

Yes. Kirchner and the CIS have decided that Chinese nationalisation is free enterprise and that being free really means being mortgaged to the organ-snatching communists. First its them buying our debt, then them buying our strategic assets, then it will be our young sheilas, then the organs of people without political power. Everything to keep an army of taxeaters from clearing their desk and getting a proper job.

The next obvious step for the government will be allowing Chinese cadre to kill dissidents on our territory, or even having our own agents carry out the assassinations on behalf of China.

Your point about the young sheilas is an interesting one, too, Bird. The lack of available young women is possibly the greatest internal threat to the Chinese regime, and I won’t be surprised if in the next few years they increasingly resort to coercive diplomacy in the region in order to procure enough womenfolk to redress the gender imbalance.

Think of the incredible scorn that the Catallaxy crowd would pour on anyone who brought evidence to bear that an odd death was a Chinese Communist assassination. You can inject someone full of plutonium and to these guys its funny and regime leadership is a conspiracy theory (and therefore oddly disproven) and out of the question. And thats the faux-libertarian side of things. Over at Prodeo they would be driving the car needed for the hit to take place. Matters really are desperate. Its soft power to be feared more than anything or in combination with hard power. Because its soft power that a dim-witted Catallaxian, or a politician, would fall for every time.

The rules have completely changed. 30 years ago no-ones planes but our allies could reach here. 50 years ago we could rely on a population that would fight to the death. Now we have none of these things, we buy our ammo from Indonesia in some cases. The people would not fight, the taxeaters would crawl all over eachother to be first to sell us out. Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra can be intimidated immediately with but a handful of nukes…. People escaping inland would not have a free labour market to employ them. The money supply would be destroyed by the slightest disruption so that an insurgency would be untenable, and yet under attack our currency would drop to a quarter of its value.

Every damn thing is wrong about our defense. Our defense position is in the process of falling away from its unassailable height in 2003. All our submariners want to go home or head down a mine. The situation has to be rescued with extreme prejudice and the last person anyone wants to consult is a neoclassical quissling.

You know I never quite liked David Lleyonhelm’s idea of dudes carrying weapons. On the intellectual side of things I could appreciate his arguments and I’d tend to defer to them. But it made me uneasy at least with the younger blokes carrying. The 35+ age group I was less worried about.

But the current state of affairs is so terrible that we cannot really nuance things. I feel the need to get fully behind our shooters. And sooner or later I’m going to have to stop putting things off in this department also. I think all of us ought to be showing up to Cato’s shooting range every now and then. I’ll be pulling out the heavy stuff when I visit the old bloke next time.

Any decent political leader would be ringing up that bloke in California that makes dragon-skin and telling him he can start up a tax-free operation in one of our inland towns any time he takes the fancy. Same goes for a lot of weapons manufacture. We ought to be doing this stuff now even though it will take some years to make a difference. Just to send the message inside and out that we are no pushovers.

But mostly we need to get back to the man and his property. The man who owns his gear and doesn’t owe no cunt nothing. Its got to be the opposite of John Lennons crapola. People have got to have something to fight for above a lot of debts and taxes.

“The next obvious step for the government will be allowing Chinese cadre to kill dissidents on our territory, or even having our own agents carry out the assassinations on behalf of China.”

Notice how even assisting the Chinese to do this is fully in keeping with Jason Soon’s avowed utilitarianism, perhaps if we charged a fee. And its also in keeping with the Humphreys cost-benefit analysis.

I agree. I did not bleed for my country and see my comrades die or become paralysed only to see what I see today. It’s time to take back our country Mr Bird. I think the first step must be to impose significant restrictions on people from unregistered countries to even set foot in Australia. We would as a first step register certain countries as our allies obviously e.g. the US, UK, New Zealand, Canada would be a start. We would have to vet carefully the rest. I have my misgivings about even some European countries but certainly people from any countries where the Mahometan creed reigns should not be welcomed here no matter what the price.

“The next obvious step for the government will be allowing Chinese cadre to kill dissidents on our territory, or even having our own agents carry out the assassinations on behalf of China.”

No no no. Johnny Chinaman is too cunning for something that obvious. Violent elimination of dissidents would attract too much attention. It might even get mentioned in the Good Morning Herald.

Much more likely is that the dissidents will be bought off with government grants (funded from the sale of our electricity and resources assets) and given tenure at one of our universities, where they will be well paid to inveigh against whale hunting (Johnny Chinaman despises Jeff Jappo) and to promote AGW fraud.

Jason Soon is suffering under the epistemological delusion that to quote a person to a leftist audience is the same as a refutation.

Notice that he lied and said something about me wanting to restrict tourism. Then he quoted a lot of what I said all of which makes perfect sense. He’s in no way in a position to refute a single line of it. The fellow is a major league nutter:

The rules have completely changed. 30 years ago no-ones planes but our allies could reach here. 50 years ago we could rely on a population that would fight to the death. Now we have none of these things, we buy our ammo from Indonesia in some cases. The people would not fight, the taxeaters would crawl all over eachother to be first to sell us out. Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra can be intimidated immediately with but a handful of nukes…. People escaping inland would not have a free labour market to employ them. The money supply would be destroyed by the slightest disruption so that an insurgency would be untenable, and yet under attack our currency would drop to a quarter of its value.”

By quoting him quoting me people get to hear the Sermon On The Mount three times over. I think its good people quoting me. But the dumb bastard is totally delusional to imagine that such quoting constitutes a refutation.

Yes Cambria I’ve grown food before. As kids we would from time to time use a plot in our orchard. Gather the worms and old cow manure and grow lettuce and things. You need snail poison and fertiliser is useful, but a bit of an extravagance given the richness of the soil where I was.

I think the worst carnage the Europeans did to Africa is left it with paper money and fractional reserve banking. Now that this is the case, when a tribe is attacked by machete-waving Arabs or black crazies, immediately their currency will be turned to toilet paper. And they cannot get together some diesel and firearms in a great good hurry to deal with this scenario. But what many have not realised is that we have put ourselves in the exact same situation. And the spontaneous Socialist Soviet Republic of New Orleans ought to have taught us this.

At the same time in Innisfail they too were paralysed. And yet those people up there are by their nature a very resourceful and enterprising bunch. But the currency will paralyse us all without discrimination. You may want to help the insurgency but you will have no means by which to do so. Only gold bars, silver coins, four wheel drives and trail bikes, and stashes of ordnance and diesel can help you through.

Most of all when you head to the bank your silver coins have got to be there.

“Well I don’t think it’s a secret that Mr SOON has a slight conflict of interest when it comes to discussing our relations with our dumpling munching neighbours to the north.”

Yes but consider the irony of it???!!!!! The lucky bastard is more fortunate than you or I because when the word goes out it will be the case that anyone of CHOGIE appearance, who is armed must be shot on sight!!!!!

The fucking lucky bastard will get to sit it out without having the responsibility of having to up and fight!!!!

I promised myself I’d get a few things done and not make any more threads for a long time. But the Winchester request weighs heavily upon my conscience when we have bipartisan quislings trying to both make us dependent on mains electricity and at the same time have that power supply put into the yellow hands of organ-snatching communists.

So clearly this has been dogging my thoughts this very day and I may not be able to avoid another thread. I go to other blogs but I cannot get the boot-quisling Tripodi out of my mind.

This is what I said over at Jennifers place.

“You pinko bastards have to understand that cheap synthetic diesel is a fundamental human right and one of the basic minimum requirements of human freedom.

We have been remiss in a way that the average martial artist would not be happy about. We have been arguing at the leftist enemy. We have occasionally slapped him around the face. But the idea is to be focused on a point behind the head or body and annihilate that which comes in between with more of a zen approach.

We want a vision of nuclear enhanced synthetic diesel that is so cheap that peak use profiteering funds all our roads and government. And off-peak we are free men who can ride around until the wheels fall off.

What is left of our liberty must fall along with our access to cheap liquid hydrocarbons. Science tells us that we can burn them until the end of time and they will always be good for the biosphere.

As a compromise we might agree to a carbon tax when the level hits 2000ppm and not 1 ppm prior.”

If there were such a thing as true justice, we would have recourse to the United Nations (I know, I know).

VERRRRRY CLOSE TO THE EDGE BROTHER. I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BUT BE VERY CAREFUL.

I can see an argument that denying us access to cheap synthetic diesel is effectively genocide under relevant conventions.

ALLS WELL THAT ENDS WELL…….

YOU BET. I’M NOT SAYING THAT EVERY LAST INDIVIDUAL WHO HASN’T GOT IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO A FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE WITH GUNRACKS ISN’T A MAN. I’M SAYING THAT ONCE THAT POSSIBILITY IS CUT OFF FOR YOUR AVERAGE JOE THATS THE END OF HUMAN FREEDOM.

BUT WE ARE NOT HERE TO PRESERVE!!!!!!!! OUR FREEDOM… BUT TO REGAIN IT…. BUT WE MUST BE MORE AMBITIOUS THEN THAT……. WE MUST GAIN TRUE FREEDOM FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME.

MAYBE NOT IN TIME FOR YOU OR FOR ME. BUT AS THE BLIND PROPHET SAYS “ONE DAY AT CHRISTMAS TIME.”

Really Alan. The CIS and the IPA have to change their ways. You guys are posing as intellectuals of liberty but all I’m seeing is you guys acting like blood-sucker-centrals loyal opposition when it comes to important strategic matters.

We are not free men without cheap liquid hydrocarbons. Simple as that. You just have to take a long look at yourself and develop a more strident attitude. And for goodness sakes make sure that attitude is beefed up whenever you walk into meetings at the IPA.

One the one hand you alleged free marketeers would have us sell all our electricity to the communist chinese and on the other hand you would make formerly free men all dependent on the grid.

I have a lot of respect for some of our elder homos. And also for some of our dignified homo couples.

I must admit a certain liking for a fellow name of David Marr. True journalist, though far better than the terrible rag he works for. True friend of liberty, though on the surface of things a bit of a lefty. (Bit of a Jekyl and Hyde character in my humble opinion.) But an absolutely staunch Australian when all is said and done.

I’ve known other gay people that I’ve had a great deal of respect for. The producer Barry Clarke for example who I met on his 40th.

And also there is those dignified older gay couples that were always humourous. Hudson and Halls and people of this sort.

But this evil sodomite that is stalking this part of the internet attempting to defame the righteous currency lad…… You do realise that if I caught you redhanded you would be food for the worms and nobody would miss you. And even your daddy would not enquire too hard as to your demise.

My advice is that you ought not try and pre-empt matters if you investigate these things. I am confident that if you go through all the evidence, coming in from many convergent areas, with an open mind….. well you ought to be able to say that this theory fits better than any others.

You don’t need to say that this theory is therefore TRUE. But its a big thing to be able to say that you don’t believe something yet nonetheless it fits the data better than current alternatives.

One thing we can be pretty sure of is that Plate Tectonics theory is no good.